Episode Transcript

Modifying Absolutes
Episode 41: February 15, 2007

Grammar Girl here. I'm so glad to be back.

Today's topic is wordiness.

I've heard from a lot of you who have pet peeves about different wordy phrases, and it's a lot of fun to hear what gets under people's skin and why.  Here's one example from Lara in New York:

One that has always bugged me is “I'm writing to tell you that.” It drives me crazy when people begin letters this way. As in “I'm writing to tell you that I am resigning from my job.” Just tell me! OK, so you're writing to tell me, but just tell me. Is this correct or is this just another redundancy?

 

I have to admit that I've been struggling with this one ever since I said not to start e-mails with the phrase I just wanted to let you know. For example: "I just wanted to let you know that I love your show,” or “I just wanted to let you know that commas are on sale today.” I couldn't figure out why starting sentences that way felt so right but seemed so wrong at the same time.

Then Jeff from Fountain Valley wrote in to comment that many of these seemingly empty phrases act as buffers, carry certain emotional weight, or demonstrate personality—and then it all came together in my head. When I'm writing an e-mail, I often imagine that I'm speaking to the person. So whereas it might feel like an abrupt command to walk up to Amy and say, “Commas are on sale today,” if I preface it with what some people might consider an empty phrase and say, “I just wanted to let you know that commas are on sale today,” then it feels less like a command and more like a helpful tip that I'm providing in case she's interested.

In Lara's example, the writer might be anxious about resigning and wanting to add some extra words as a buffer. So even though I still believe that a lot of the time people just use these phrases out of habit—and that it's a bad habit— I'll concede that sometimes these “buffer phrases” do have a place in the world. Just check in with yourself every once in a while to make sure that you're not using them for no reason, and be especially aware of them when you're writing something more formal than an e-mail.

On the other hand, there are words that typically don't serve any purpose. For example, Sha from the Philippines wrote in to ask if I have any suggestions as to how people can avoid using filler words such as actually, so, and like. As I told Maret from Chicago, who also wrote in asking how to stop peppering her speech with the word like, I am especially sympathetic to this problem because it's a bad habit I picked up as a teenager, and I still have to consciously suppress the valley girl in my head, especially when I'm speaking off-the-cuff.* All I can say is. yes—it's bad to use these empty words, and the only way I know of to stop doing it is to make a conscious effort to stop. If part of the problem is that all of your friends talk the same way, and if they're interested in stopping too, then it might be helpful to make a pact and point it out to each other when any of you slips up. Getting friends who are more articulate might help, but that seems extreme.

Here's another quick peeve: a listener named Anne points out that the phrase in order is often unneeded. For example, some people say, "I am going to the market in order to buy groceries.” It would mean the same thing if they said, “I am going to the market to buy groceries.” In order is unnecessary.

Another listener named Rocky seems to be hiring because he wrote in with a long list of complaints about phrases that sound like they could only come from cover letters and resumes, and he included some imaginary responses to them. For example, he writes, “'Please don't hesitate to contact me.' OK, I was sitting here in a state of apprehension about whether to call (or not), but since you have now given me permission, I guess I'll go ahead and call. 'Call me at your earliest possible convenience.' Don't we always contact someone at our own convenience?” He would rather see something simple and straightforward like “Call me if you have questions.”

Now here's another wordiness issue that actually turns out to be controversial. Kellie left a comment on the Grammar Girl blog saying that her pet peeve is when people modify the word unique. For example, “That is the most unique painting I've ever seen.” The issue is that the primary meaning of  unique is one of a kind; it's an absolute, so something can't be more unique than something else. Chris, who teaches English in Japan, and a listener named Julie also wrote in about modifying absolute words. Here's the deal: every authoritative source I checked (1,2,3) said it's bad to qualify or compare the word unique, and then in the next breath they all acknowledged that it's commonly done, and that it's been done for a long time.

For example, Fowler considers  unique to be weakened in the sentence “Those are very unique marimbas.” He says, “It must be conceded that unique is losing its quality of being not gradable (or absolute),” but he also notes that it continues to be controversial.

According to The Oxford English Dictionary, since the middle of the 19th century unique has “had a tendency to take the wider meaning of ‘uncommon, unusual, remarkable’" (4).

A lot of usage notes talk about the role advertising plays in diluting the meaning of unique (1, 2). I had to laugh because I have a friend who sells new homes and I recently gave her a hard time after she  made a sign advertising her “unique” new subdivision. I live in one of these subdivisons, so I'm not knocking them, but you can get lost because all the houses look alike. They are anything but unique, and her sign just cracked me up. So now I can tell her she is contributing to the downfall of the language!

It seems to me that the trend toward talking about degrees of uniqueness is an example of how language changes. I had to ask myself if I am on the side of sticking with the older rule or going with common usage, and in this case I think unique should continue to mean one of a kind. There are plenty of other words that people can use to talk about degrees. A piece of art can be the most stunning painting you've ever seen, or the marimbas can be very unusual. There's just no reason to assign a new meaning to unique. So it's good to know that this is a controversial area of language, but I can't recommend modifying absolute words with qualifiers in phrases like very unique, completely destroyed, or most fatal.

That's all.

Thanks again to everyone who sent me get-well wishes. My cold is finally subsiding and I'm feeling much better.

I have one more copy of Words of a Feather: A Humorous Puzzlement of Etymological Pairs by Murray Suid to give away, and the winner is Kim from Minneapolis, who entered by e-mailing me with a grammar question.

For the normal book giveaway, people enter by e-mailing me or posting a message on the blog, but for the next few weeks we have a new book giveaway that I'm really excited about. I'm doing a cross-promotion with Scott Sigler, who is the author of Earthcore, which he claims was the world's first podcast  novel (5). Scott has a new science fiction novel called Ancestor coming out April 1st, and I have three review copies that I'm going to give away on March 15th. That's right, you can win these books before they are available in stores! So, to enter this special book giveaway, all you have to do is send an e-mail to sigler@qdnow.com. Only one entry is allowed per person, and I'll give away three books on March 15th.

We also launched a new Quick and Dirty podcast while I was sick called The Mighty Mommy's Quick and Dirty Tips for Practical Parenting. You can find The Mighty Mommy at iTunes or at QDnow.com, where you'll also find a transcript of this podcast.

Questions and comments for me, Grammar Girl, go to feedback@qdnow.com or the voice-mail line at 206-338-GIRL (4475). Thanks for listening.

*Off-the-cuff is an idiom that refers to an unplanned or impromptu remark.


References

  1. Burchfield, R.W., ed. The New Fowler's Modern English Usage. Third edition. New York: Oxford, 1996, p.  808.
  2. unique. Amerian Heritage College Dictionary, Third edition. Boston: Houghton Mifflin, 1993, p.1476.
  3. unique. Dictionary.com. Dictionary.com Unabridged (v 1.1). Random House, Inc. http://dictionary.reference.com/browse/unique (accessed February 15, 2007).
  4. unique. Oxford English Dictionary. Second edition. Oxford University Press, http://tinyurl.com/2vcgpz (accessed February 15, 2007).
  5. Sigler, S. Earthcore: A Podcast Novel. http://www.scottsigler.net/blog/ (accessed February 15, 2007).

Extras


Comments (40) for Modifying Absolutes |  Subscribe to Comment

Omorose Panya Says:
8/18/2009 8:18:55 PM
John, I see no contradiction. "According to the Oxford Dictionary" is--wait for it-- according to the Oxford dictionary, not her. SHE (<-- not dictionary; her opinion) thinks there is no use for the "wider meaning". I (<-- erased "have to") agree with her.
Omorose Panya Says:
8/18/2009 8:13:59 PM
I don't think I say "very unique" often---simply because I don't describe things as unique! (C'mon, you know very few things are unique these days.) I do realize that I says things like "completely destroyed" and I recognize the superfluousness (<-- wanted to type "superfluousity" but I guess that's not a word, lol). I have never really thought about this before, so thank you for the podcast. I will make a conscious effort to stop =)
John Says:
2/9/2008 12:34:37 PM
Grammar girls seems to contradict herself when she says "According to The Oxford English Dictionary, since the middle of the 19th century unique has “had a tendency to take the wider meaning", and "There's just no reason to assign a new meaning to unique." I wouldn't call the middle of the 19th century "new"!
Allen Says:
2/21/2007 4:05:59 AM
Being a singer, I feel that one would only write "I can succeed AT singing" when one is capable of putting the vocal cords together and making sound, as in 'the concept of singing.' For "I can succeed IN singing," I believe that the addition of the phrase "the field of" after "in" would make for a clearer idea. "I can succeed IN singing" will probably be taken as a career-oriented sentence, e.g. I can succeed in singing, cooking, or television.
Allen Says:
2/21/2007 3:56:13 AM
Perhaps it's irrelevant--like that has ever stopped anyone--but I don't feel like the phrase "completely destroyed" is an egregious mistake. If something can be qualified as partially destroyed, it must therefore be able to be used with another qualifier, right? For some reason, perhaps due to the constant (d)evolution of the language, the softening of the word doesn't sound at all peculiar to my ear. (Upon a further ten seconds of review, "partially destroyed" could simply mean that a part of the unit was [wholly] destroyed, although this offers me little solace.)
Sarah G Says:
2/21/2007 1:55:00 AM
Hi Grammar girl, thanks for this podcast episode, and for your podcast as a whole (i'm sure there is something grammatically incorrect in that sentence, but I guess I need another episode to pinpoint what it is). I am a student in the 10th grade, and I find these podcasts a fast and easy way to improve the quality of my English. This particular episode made me realize what a common problem modifying absolutes is in every day speech - and how much I need to improve. :(
:Grammar Girl Says:
2/20/2007 11:11:30 PM
If it feels right, I usually start e-mails with "Hi." For example, "Hi Ingrid." If I feel that a more formal tone is called for, then I'll just use the person's name followed by a colon.
Grammar Girl Says:
2/20/2007 11:05:08 PM
You'll enjoy this page, which explains that "as per" means “in accordance with,” or “in response to the request made.”

The

Grammar Girl Says:
2/20/2007 10:56:53 PM
I'm having a hard time answering this one. I would say, "I can excel at singing" or "I can succeed in the music industry." To me, singing doesn't seem like something you succeed in or at. Can anyone else jump in here and give Sri a better answer?
Grammar Girl Says:
2/20/2007 10:53:10 PM
It depends on who you are writing to. If you are writing to a friend, e-mail is usually informal. If you are writing a thank you e-mail to follow up on a job interview, you should treat it as something formal. (Mr. Manners would probably recommend sending a snail mail thank you note!) I tend to be a pretty informal person, so I slip into informal mode very quickly when I am e-mailing people, even if they are business associates. I can see how getting a one-word response can be annoying if more is called for, but I get a lot of e-mail and sometimes I appreciated the brevity of a one-word answer (if that is all that is needed)
:Grammar Girl Says:
2/20/2007 10:44:39 PM
Kitty is correct and so is David. Here's the Grammar Girl episode on ending sentences with prepositions. -----
Grammar Girl Says:
2/20/2007 10:42:11 PM
My copy of the American Heritage Dictionary has a long discussion about unique that makes many of the arguments that you make. It even uses paintings as an example. The part that I found interesting was the part where they talked about a restaurant being called unique by a restaurant reviewer because of its decor. They essentially argued that although pink and green walls might "render a restaurant logically unique, they do not constitute legitimate grounds for putting the restaurant in a class by itself."
:John Faherty Says:
2/20/2007 10:13:17 PM
My name is John Faherty. I am a reporter at The Arizona Republic in Phoenix. This week, I will be interviewing the Grammar Girl for a story. I would love to "chat" with any of you regarding why you enjoy this podcast. If you are interested/willing please email me at john.faherty@arizonarepublic.com. Thanks. John
David Says:
2/20/2007 9:39:09 PM
The so-called rule that you don't end sentences with prepositions isn't a rule at all. Trying to adhere to it can lead you quickly to absurdity. As Winston Churchill once wrote next to one example of this, 'This is the sort of English up with which I will not put.'
Julia Says:
2/20/2007 8:30:41 PM
Rocky might be tired of phrases such as, "Call me at your earliest possible convenience," or "Please don't hesitate to contact me," but in a formal business setting those types of phrases are commonly used to convey a strong message in the kindest, most respectful way. These phrases often lend a formal and professional tone in emails. I have received emails with phases that might sound appropriate when spoken but sound like commands when written: "If I were you, I would contact..." When I correspond for business purposes, I very much appreciate receiving and choose to use phrases that are direct, kind, and do not assume. I am especially careful to use more formal conventions when corresponding with Europeans. In a business setting it is simply considered respectful. Regards, Julia -----
Kitty Says:
2/20/2007 7:02:39 PM
I think the real issue here is that "at" is unnecessary regardless of place within sentence: "Where are you?" Aarvark asked Squiggly. Colloquially, when Aardvark says, "Where you aatttt?!" he is inquiring as to Squiggly's overall state as well as his location.
Kitty Says:
2/20/2007 6:46:57 PM
My best friend has flown over 2.1 million miles in his 32 years on (& off) Earth. He loves his flight attendants but bristles upon hearing his flight is *very* full. It's either full or not full & could you please bring him another glass of Champagne?
Karl Says:
2/20/2007 6:09:49 PM
"...shouldn't be USED at all," I mean.
Karl Says:
2/20/2007 6:08:32 PM
If you really insist on "unique" being absolute, then either everything is unique or nothing is unique. Any two things must have SOMETHING in common--even if nothing more than your consideration of them in this context. While everything has something in common with everything else, no two things are perfectly identical. So, you absolutists, is everything unique, or is nothing unique? If you want to go with "one-of-a-kind" as the definition, I have some questions for you. What kind? In what respects? Clearly you must have some criteria for comparison of this "one" to everything else in its "kind." All members of a "kind" will have certain features that set them apart. Some members may have more unusual features than others. Does that make all members unique or no members unique? Or, can some members be more unique than others? (I think so.) I like the painting example above. The bottom line for me is that "unique" is an imprecise word that carries a lot of baggage and probably shouldn't be at all. So, I have no problem with people modifying it, though I'll admit it's usually done for dramatic effect, rather than refinement of meaning.
John Says:
2/20/2007 3:23:30 PM
I think it makes more sense to think of the "ir" in "irregardless" not as a negative, but as an intensifier. The forms "ir" "in" "im" etc. do not always function as negatives, for instance: irradiate imperil impose
Greg Says:
2/20/2007 5:07:36 AM
A phrase I hear a lot is, "Where are you at?" Maybe you could do a podcast on prepositions; reminding people that they are words you don't end sentences with. (ha!)
Jeff Says:
2/20/2007 12:54:49 AM
Part of your friend's problem could be Boston-based. I know "irregardless" is an accepted part of the Boston English lexicon. We Bostonians tend to emphasize the negative. For example, if my grandfather were trying to fix your bike, he would say, "Let's see if I can't fix this bike." While I find the latter construction an endearing part of our dialect, I am vehemently opposed to irregardless. Although, I think it is more an issue for older people. As a copywriter at a PR firm in Boston, I tend to see irregardless by the older employees more often than the younger employees. The biggest issue is probably the overuse of the portmanteau in informal speech that allowed it to creep into formal writing. Overall, I think it is a nonsensical double negative that should be ridiculed. Speaking of pet peeves and double negatives, I hate when I see "can't help but" or "can't hardly" in writing. I have grown to accept it as an intractably embedded idiom in spoken English. However, I see it all the time in newspaper articles, press releases and other formal writing. This "idiom" has a special place in our company's style guide. Unfortunately, many of the employees still can't help but use it.
Katie Says:
2/19/2007 6:02:22 PM
What about VH1s "Best Week Ever"?Love your podcast. My "empty word" pet peeve is "IRREGARDLESS" My Harvard educated finance friend uses this word. That bugs me. Or, am I wrong about that word? Also, any songs about semi-colons or dashes? I use those and feel like I am driving on the Autobahn; reckless, fast and --someone is bound to pull me over. See? Help! I really liked the song about apostrophes!
Al Lemieux Says:
2/19/2007 3:12:22 PM
In your recent podcast, you suggested that emails are informal. When I write emails, I try to write them in a semi-formal manner. I can't stand getting an email with a one or two word response to a lengthy question. It's frustrating and unclear sometimes when people abuse the medium and don't use it as if they would have to communicate without it. I know this a slippery issue, but what are your thoughts on email formalities?
Ingrid Says:
2/19/2007 4:15:32 AM
Dear Grammar Girl - My question concerns the very word I used to address you in this note - "Dear." Is there any other way to begin a letter of correspondence to a friend or loved one? Of course, I understand that people you write to are "dear" to us, but I can't seem to come up with an alternative "lead-in" adjective/modifier for my addressee's name. Just beginning with the person's name seems really abrupt. What do you think?
Sri Says:
2/19/2007 4:07:54 AM
Hi Grammar Girl! I have a question for you. Which is correct: "I can succeed at singing," versus "I can succeed in singing." Is there a quick and dirty rule that we listeners can use to choose between "at" and "in" in these cases? Thanks!
David Says:
2/18/2007 11:33:28 PM
I'm afraid I disagree with your equating 'most unique painting' with 'most stunning painting' (note the wordy phrase 'I'm afraid' used as a softener!). The two phrases have very different meanings. I also don't have any problem with modifying 'unique'. General usage is quite correct to distinguish between degrees of uniqueness. Say we have a group of five paintings. Four of them are conventional 19th century academic portraits, and the fifth is a cubist portrait by Picasso. Each painting is unique. No other painting exactly like it exists. However, four of them are very similar, and one is very dfferent: it is the most unique.
Grammar Girl Says:
2/17/2007 10:12:21 PM
There really isn't much difference between "speak" and "talk." This page answers your question in a bit more detail: http://www.mtannoyances.com/?p=462.
Mark M EMAIL Says:
2/17/2007 3:11:59 PM
don't know if this comes under the "wordiness" banner but has anyone ever heard something like this? "I ordered pizza without anchovies as per your instructions." Is it just me or is there something wrong with the "as per your..." part? It just grates on my nerves. I guess I would have been more comfortable with using "... as you instructed" instead. And thanks for a great podcast.
Arun Says:
2/17/2007 2:42:12 PM
In this podcast, I noticed you used the word "talk" in a situation where I would have used "speak." "If part of the problem is that all of your friends talk the same way, ..." Can you explain the difference? Or is there a difference? Thanks, Arun -----
Steve Moore Says:
2/17/2007 6:12:25 AM
There is also another important function "filler" words serve--rhythm. The English language, being mostly iambic, has a distinct and regular rhythm. Although most people don't realize it, they use useless phrases, intensifiers, and filler words to fulfill the aesthetic desires of our ear, not necessarily to communicate anything. Although few people hear it consciously, the iambic pentameter is still deeply ingrained into the cultural subconscious. Often as we speak and write, we are simply trying to get closer to the fulfillment of rhythm, or even the end of the pentameter line.
John Says:
2/17/2007 6:11:47 AM
"What, then, is the intelligent writer to make of unique? The evidence allows several definite conclusions. Those who insist that unique cannot be modified by such adverbs as more, most, and very are clearly wrong: our eidence shows that it can be and frequently is modified by such adverbs. Those who believe that the use of such modifiers threatens to weaken (or has already weakened) the "having no like or equal" sense of unique are also wrong: our evidence shows that the "having no like or equal" sense is flourishing. And those who regard the use of unique to mean "unusual" or "distinctive" as a modern corruption are wrong: unique has been used with those meanings for well over a hundred years. Should you therefore use the disputed sense of unique with utter disregrard for possible criticism? Maybe not. The reason people have for disliking such usage may not be especially sound, but they are cherished nonetheless, and they are wideley promoted. You will have to make your own choice base on your knowledge." And Bill Poser on "more perfect": http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000995.html -----
John Says:
2/17/2007 6:11:47 AM
For a different opinion, this is Merriam-Webster's Concise Dictionary of English Usage on "unique": "What, then, is the intelligent writer to make of unique? The evidence allows several definite conclusions. Those who insist that unique cannot be modified by such adverbs as more, most, and very are clearly wrong: our eidence shows that it can be and frequently is modified by such adverbs. Those who believe that the use of such modifiers threatens to weaken (or has already weakened) the "having no like or equal" sense of unique are also wrong: our evidence shows that the "having no like or equal" sense is flourishing. And those who regard the use of unique to mean "unusual" or "distinctive" as a modern corruption are wrong: unique has been used with those meanings for well over a hundred years. Should you therefore use the disputed sense of unique with utter disregrard for possible criticism? Maybe not. The reason people have for disliking such usage may not be especially sound, but they are cherished nonetheless, and they are wideley promoted. You will have to make your own choice base on your knowledge." And Bill Poser on "more perfect": http://itre.cis.upenn.edu/~myl/languagelog/archives/000995.html
Kellie Says:
2/17/2007 2:32:12 AM
I agree, but there is a difference between "almost unique" and "very unique". Something can be legitimately almost unique, as in very rare but not actually one-of-a-kind. However, something cannot be "very unique", as the word "very" implies that it is more unique than the word unique indicates on its own, which is impossible as unique is an absolute meaning "one of a kind". It can't be more one of a kind than it already is.
Scott Royall Says:
2/17/2007 12:32:46 AM
There's another aspect of seemingly useless phrases that perhaps you overlooked. They are often used to tie the following verbiage together as an unified response to an anticipated question. For example, "I'm writing to tell you..." anticipates "Why are you taking up my time?", and more colorful variants. The practice tells the reader that the author recognizes the importance of such unasked questions, and intends to answer them immediately. Whether or not he succeeds is clearly a separate matter.
John Faherty Says:
2/16/2007 7:25:53 PM
Dear Stefan, My name is John Faherty, I am a reporter for a newspaper, The Arizona Republic. Next week, I am writing a story on Grammar Girl. Could you tell me how you found her, and why you listen? For the story, I would need to include your full name, and town. If that is ok with you, please respond. Thanks.
Jim Says:
2/16/2007 4:11:50 PM
Just because a word is an absolute does not mean that it does not exist in a spectrum of meaning. "Unique" and "perfect" are two examples of such words. If there is only one thing of a kind from a set of a million things, then it is unique. If there are two things of a kind, then they are "almost unique". Bowling 300 is a perfect score. Bowling 299 is "almost perfect". Granted, "almost perfect" is NOT perfect. But you must allow language to express a spectrum of qualities relative to these absolute words.
Steve Jaccobs Says:
2/16/2007 3:19:49 PM
I love your podcast and it really is helpful. However, it leaves you open to all sorts of nit-pickers -- like me. In this podcast when referring to the 'empty phrases', you say the writer should make sure he or she is "not using them for no reason". That sounds to me like a double negative. I'm glad you're feeling better and, as a physician, must suggest you (and everyone else) get an influenza shot next year. By the way (an empty phrase if I've ever heard one), as a child of an English teacher I remember in medical school reading the radiologist's reading of a chest xray: "The xray findings were not unremarkable." My profession's writing skills would make you laugh. Thanks again for the podcast.
Don Says:
2/16/2007 1:56:13 PM
My least favorite (how's that for modifying an absolute?) waste of words: "relative to," often used in politics and business. "My feelings relative to this subject are quite clear." It's rarely needed and the people who use it tend to do so over and over. It probably belongs in the category you started today's podcast with: How we use words to make ourselves sound better, nicer, intelligent, subtle, discerning, etc., but to me, it's like a giant sign that says: I really don't know what I'm talking about or I'd rather bore you than inform you. Thanks for your show. I really enjoy it.
Steeefan Says:
2/16/2007 10:06:59 AM
Hey Grammar Girl, great show you are doing here!

Just wanted to let you know (there you have that again...), that we've got the same problem concerning "most unique" in Germany with the word "einzig", which is also absolute. People always use it's nonexistend superlative "einzigste" which is not possible. Haven't checked with our dictionary of choice, German Duden, but I suppose they have not approved it and I hope they don't do so.

Greetings from Germany, -Stefan

Add Comment

 *
 *
 *
  Image to deter spam submissions
  To deter spam submissions, please type the letters from the image into the box below:
 *
 
  Fields marked with "*" are required